Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<d8a9608b7ae74fde0e364d794faeeed25dd2e227@i2pn2.org> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: joes <noreply@example.org> Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy Subject: Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2024 11:56:22 -0000 (UTC) Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <d8a9608b7ae74fde0e364d794faeeed25dd2e227@i2pn2.org> References: <vhdd32$oq0l$1@dont-email.me> <c8e35b5f542012b2d798e7fe2afc3004298a2aa5@i2pn2.org> <vhdn96$r2jp$1@dont-email.me> <907b6e45c74720036b5f42c503d76ac426a71c92@i2pn2.org> <vhe69i$tuln$2@dont-email.me> <622e5aa555a9941d4cdb292d1e3e54e687e7b547@i2pn2.org> <vhe9rl$ue1m$2@dont-email.me> <254d3e7be0462ba8225ec0eb4804941ea635770d@i2pn2.org> <vheecn$12v3p$1@dont-email.me> <031e34cbeacc2a7b5145fd1f25ccee588e8cfb43@i2pn2.org> <vhg1oe$1cfbe$2@dont-email.me> <aa621f0677187fad3eb5b7f20715247c3ffbd61e@i2pn2.org> <vhg39s$1csnf$1@dont-email.me> <b4aade7ae93d862bd313e00abe20deab78124e18@i2pn2.org> <vhg7jg$1dmht$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2024 11:56:22 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="3184812"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM"; User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Bytes: 4629 Lines: 64 Am Mon, 18 Nov 2024 14:21:04 -0600 schrieb olcott: > On 11/18/2024 1:23 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 11/18/24 2:07 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 11/18/2024 1:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 11/18/24 1:41 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 11/18/2024 10:16 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>> On 11/17/24 11:04 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 11/17/2024 9:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> On 11/17/24 9:47 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 11/17/2024 8:26 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 11/17/24 8:46 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 11/17/2024 4:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/17/24 4:30 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/17/2024 2:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/17/24 1:36 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Which is just what YOU are doing, as "Halting" and what a >>>>>>>>>>>> "Program" is are DEFINED, and you can't change it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> YET ANOTHER STUPID LIE. >>>>>>>>>>> A SMART LIAR WOULD NEVER SAY THAT I MEANT PROGRAM WHEN I >>>>>>>>>>> ALWAYS SPECIFIED A C FUNCTION. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> But then you can talk about "emulation" or x86 semantics, as >>>>>>>>>> both of those are operations done on PROGRAMS. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> No stupid I provided a published paper that includes the >>>>>>>>> termination analysis of C functions. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Look again at what they process. C functions that include all the >>>>>>>> functions they call. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> You stupidly claimed termination analysis is only done on >>>>>>> programs. I proved that you were stupidly wrong on pages 24-27 of >>>>>>> the PDF of this paper. >>>>>>> Automated Termination Analysis of C Programs >>>>>>> https://publications.rwth-aachen.de/record/972440/files/972440.pdf >>>>>>> >>>>>> The problem here is you are mixing language between domains. >>>>> >>>>> I said the termination analysis applies to C functions you said that >>>>> it does not. No weasel words around it YOU WERE WRONG! >>>>> >>>> Termination analysis applies to FUNCTIONS, FULL FUNCTIONS, ones that >>>> include everything that is part of them. Those things, in computation >>>> theory, are called PROGRAMS. >>> >>> The top of PDF page 24 are not programs defection for brains. >>> https://publications.rwth-aachen.de/record/972440/files/972440.pdf >>> >> Those *ARE* "Computation Theory" Programs. >> They are also LEAF functions, unlike your DDD. >> NOTHING in that paper (form what I can see) talks about handling non- >> leaf-functions with including all the code in the routines it calls. >> > Since the halting problem is defined to have the input call its own > termination analyzer and the termination analyzer is itself required to > halt then any sequence of this input that would prevent it from halting > IS A NON-HALTING SEQUENCE THAT MUST BE ABORTED AND CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO > CONTINUE. What happens when we run HHH(HHH)? -- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math: It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.